1) FLA contracted (sorry Habsolutely, no offense intended)
2) PHX contracted
3) CLB moved to Markham (the fact that the leafs had nearly twice the the revenue of anyone else despite being terrible for the better part of a decade shows that the GTA market could support two teams)
4) ANA moved to Seattle (California doesn’t need 3 teams)
5) Dal moved to Milwaukee (don’t even know if they have an arena but whatever it’s my day off and I’m drinking)
6) NY Islanders “moved” to Brooklyn, NJ moved to QC.

Just read through your post down below Neumann (which I read in a Seinfeld voice every time, spelling not withstanding). Thanks for such a detailed response.

And I realize that “hopeless naive dreamer proposal” is an apt description of my post. But I can’t play NHL13 yet so I need y’all to help me with the crushing denial with which I’m afflicted at the moment.

Haha, I do the exact same thing Sheehy, before I begin to read his post I appropriately say “Newman” with gritted teeth, the best part is many call me Gerry, so I always feel in character when reading his posts.

Doesn’t hurt that as usual I agree with his post, as I mentioned way down the thread 2 contractions and 2 relocations and this league is in a complete different picture financially, and way more profitable for the players.

By the way, with you, Burl, and Bripro all changing your pictures this has been a difficult week of transition. Could y’all space it out next time? My life is in disarray as it is with the possibility of no NHL.

The wealthier players who have endorsement income and signing bonuses are taking jobs in Europe. It seems there is very little player solidarity. The average earner in the NHL is taking the brunt of this and will not likely recover their lost wages. My guess is player solidarity will wane quickly. The owners will not end the lockout until they get the best deal they feel they can get.

I know mine is unrealistic, and that’s as generous as I can be with it. Like you said, I think the players will break by November. The league can wait them out. I’m just annoyed they took the Lockout path again.

Why should a player who is locked out, not be able to take other employment.

Why is this a big problem for solidarity?

I don’t see it… and I don’t think the players see it that way.

The players may crack and give in to the owners demands like they did in 2005 but I doubt the fact that Joe Thornton went to Europe (and made barely more than the insurance he has to pay in order to play in that league) has anything to do with it. I think the bigger issue is the missed paycheques from the NHL.

Rompin”Ronnie Hawkins whose band later became “THE BAND” was once asked,”Ronnie you made a lot of money, now you are broke ,what happened?” He said, Well, I spent half my money on booze and women. The other half, I spent foolishly”

#1. Too many teams / drop down to 24
#2. Split the pie 50/50
#3. Stupid to go to Europe / injury risk
#4. Underfunded pension for the superstars of the past (who are an important reason for millionaires today)
#5. Fans will walk to other sports / IMO most true in the USA

n/b I am a HABS fan(atic) because as a child Guy Lafleur was my sports idol….and remains true to this day!

Right on Guy! On every point! WTF is so hard to understand amigos! We have been fed a steady diet of BS from Bettman and the owners for so long it is as they say”Bullsh*t Baffles Brains”. Spread the word, Vive La Revolucion!

That is probably a factor Ed, but I think the lawsuit Moyes slaps the NHL with the minute they move that franchise and the fact it would cost money and open the door for more franchise movement is a bigger concern. Also Mr. Gretzky would play a part in that lawsuit as he is still owed money and the NHL didn’t exactly part company with him on good terms.

They are willing to play for less money for what they hope is a reasonable amount of time instead of letting their salaries get rolled back 20% over the lengths of their contracts. If a player is under contract for another 5, 7, 10 or more years, that’s a lot of freaking money.

I heard a comment that the insurance to play in these other leagues is so high many players won’t make any money – or hardly any.

They are going because they want to play. I believe this. I’ve never been a professional athlete (I wish!) but every year I can’t wait to get out on the soccer field and play. These guys have built their LIVES around this – prepping in the summer for a winter of giving it all they have. Well, except for Gomez.

If your own employer locked you out because he wanted to cut your pay by 20%, wouldn’t you find a job elsewhere too — even if it paid less than your regular one — to help pay the bills until the labour dispute was resolved?

Mike Boone: “With Gainey at my side, I’d walk into any dark alley in the world.”

We can question the League numbers, the Forbes numbers, the Players’ numbers, the Leavitt report numbers. All are flawed sources.

But what appears to be the case is that about 30% of the league makes big profits. These are the usual suspects, really the Original 6 plus big market actual hockey market teams like Philly and Vancouver.

About 60% are floating around the break even point maybe +/- $5M a year or so. At the top of this bracket are the teams that in a typical season are slightly profitable. This can be in the “we make the playoffs, we make a profit” territory. A lot are in the “affordable loss to write off for megalomaniac sports team owner” territory. There are some teams in marginal or small markets without deep pockets owners who can struggle even with Playoff revenue. But these teams are not hopeless.

About 10% of the teams are hopeless money sinkholes. These are the bleeding disasters. Non-hockey markets or ten-year doormats. A team may fall into this category by virtue of being chronically terrible, or in too small a market, or having an inadequate or poorly located arena. Obviously Phoenix and Columbus are charter members of this class, Florida has a lot to overcome, but teams like the Islanders or the Devils may fall in there for reasons that are not as doomingly structural (current ownership and arena qualities/location).

They need a way to ditch the no-hoper teams and find a generic source of revenue that can be credibly split up evenly. (eg expecting significant gate revenue or local television revenue to flow from rich teams to poor teams is pointless).

It is hard enough getting the New York Rangers to want to kick in $20-$30M a year to a revenue sharing fund to distribute $5M a piece to the marginal have nots, let alone actually step up to pay for the grandma-in-a-coma teams like Phoenix.

So the obvious solution is this:
Contract the league by two teams. Staunch the bleeding.
Get a big National TV contract that contributes roughly $150M a year or so more than current which would address the operating losses of the marginal teams

However neither of these things will happen. Neither the Players nor Owners want contraction for reasons of job loss and franchise value. The whole rationale for teams in Phoenix and Miami was to make the NHL a national presence worthy of a National TV deal. Retrenching just jeopardizes that illusion.

Plus the NHL signed a 10 year deal with NBC that isn’t going to get any richer. The $7M or so that each team must be getting annually from that deal has to be about $7M more than they had any reason to expect from the history of the last 20 years, and it isn’t going to increase suddenly.

” he would consider staying in his home country full time if player salaries are cut dramatically in the next collective bargaining agreement. ”
I wonder if the words “cut dramatically” confirms what I’ve thought all along. If the owners would finally offer something better to the players that didn’t insult them, they would move off their strong stance regarding absolutely no decrease in salary, and be willing to start negotiating in good faith. The NHL’s original proposal of 43% was ridiculous and I think they hoped the players would come down, they’d go up, they’d meet in the middle somewhere. The owners need to offer something closer to where the players are willing to settle and can save face.

Kind of hoping that the lockout lasts at least a year. This way it will allow the younger players to develop in Hamilton so that we don’t have to watch the same malcontents in fall 2013. It would be a breath of fresh air to see Gallagher, Ellis, Tinordi , LeBlanc, Bournival,Beaulieu,Galchenyuk skating with enthusiasm instead of the usual suspects.
In the meantime I will enjoy watching the seasons turn and ESPN classic games of the mid 70’s Habs.
PS.. The luckiest folks are those that live in Hamilton, kind of like those that were in Halifax in the early 1970’s watching the Voyegeurs!!